General Dwivedi’s reminder that the security forces reforms are “the need of the hour” should put to rest any doubts about implementing the ‘theatre’
George Bernard Shaw once famously said “Progress is impossible without change.” Indeed, maintaining status quo is no progress and eventually it leaves you behind in the race. The world around us is changing — the geopoltics is changing at a fast pace and so it is imperative that our preparation to meet the new age challenges should be upgraded to meet the challenges of the changing times. Defence preparedness is no exception more so when our challengers are upgrading at a breakneck speed. Unfortunately one of the cherished concept of organisation – the theaterisation – is languishing in files. But recent remarks of the Army Chief give it new urgency.
The Army Chief’s views on theaterisation leave little room for doubt: India will have to embrace this reform, if not today then tomorrow. General Upendra Dwivedi’s assertion that the restructuring of the armed forces is both “inevitable and the need of the hour” comes at a time when the debate within the services has spilled into the open. His additional reference to the creation of an agency for cognitive warfare —an extension of the information domain — only amplifies the scope of the challenges that lie ahead.
At its core, theaterisation is about unifying the Army, Navy and Air Force under joint commands with a single operational commander. It is a time tested organisational reform that India needs to implement. It is premised on a simple truth: wars are no longer fought by separate services guarding their turf but as multi-domain campaigns that cut across land, sea, air, cyber, space and information. India’s borders in the north and a vast oceanic expanse in the south, leaves little room for fragmented approach. Whether it is the BSF and ITBP on the frontlines, the cyber and space agencies, or civilian institutions like ISRO and the Railways — coordination in the next war will demand a single point of command. Theaterisation seeks to provide exactly that.
And yet, more than two decades after the idea was first floated, implementation remains elusive. The Army has consistently backed theaterisation, recognising its potential to streamline manpower and sharpen command. The Navy has also been supportive but the Air Force, has been wary. With scarce fighter squadrons and high-value assets, it prefers its centralised control rather than parcelling resources out to multiple theatre commands. Its leadership argues that air power is inherently flexible and should not be tied down to rigid geographic silos. They argue that it would affect doctrine, hierarchy and institutional identity. But its advantages far out do the challenges. The US and China have reaped advantages from this reform. It is time to find solution to Air Force reservations and move forward with confidence. Theaterisation is not about diminishing any one service but about strengthening the nation’s collective ability to respond quickly in times of national emergency.
